Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
User avatar
WesternDC6B
Topic Author
Posts: 848
Joined: Thu Mar 14, 2013 3:05 pm

What will airlines do when Boeing replaces the 737?

Thu Sep 02, 2021 4:34 pm

Fellow A'Netters, I don't know if this topic has been brought up, and if so, my apologies.

Here goes.

The 737 has been poked, prodded, tweaked, adjusted, folded, stapled, and mutilated to the point I doubt Boeing can wring yet still another further different variant out of it.

On the Airbus side: the 320 family is certainly newer and has more room for poking, prodding, tweaking, etc, but even it is getting long in the tooth.

If either Boeing or Airbus decide to release some new airframes to replace these cash cows, what do you folks think that the Ryanairs and the Southwests on the Boeing side, and the Frontiers and Americans on the Airbus side, will do?

I know that cost of operation for a particular mission is one of the main bottom-line considerations but, so is fleet commonality. If present engines are carried over, that is a big thing to consider. With the new planes causing a re-assessment of these things, what is likely to happen? Will manufacturer loyalty enter much into this? Or, will these various loyal airlines be open to a wider viewpoint?
 
silentbob
Posts: 1647
Joined: Tue Aug 15, 2006 1:26 pm

Re: The Approaching Fork in the Road

Thu Sep 02, 2021 5:14 pm

Many airlines will try to get a deal on the last current models off the line. Others will try to get a deal to be the launch customer. Some may do both. Present engines will not be carried over, a new generation will be needed to ensure the required fuel efficiency improvement over current aircraft models is achieved.
 
FlyingElvii
Posts: 1819
Joined: Wed Dec 27, 2017 10:53 pm

Re: The Approaching Fork in the Road

Thu Sep 02, 2021 5:19 pm

“If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it” has been a corporate philosophy for a long time. Until something comes along the breaks the mold and makes economic sense to absorb the costs of switching, your grandchildren’s children will still be flying on 737’s.
 
jetmatt777
Posts: 4812
Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2005 2:16 am

Re: The Approaching Fork in the Road

Thu Sep 02, 2021 5:27 pm

I predict Southwest will be brought kicking and screaming into a new aircraft type; and once they have it they will launch their advertising blasting other airlines that still happen to operate the 737 for flying antiquated equipment. Much like Southwest does with every new thing they have begrudgingly tried.
 
User avatar
DarkSnowyNight
Posts: 2970
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2012 7:59 pm

Re: The Approaching Fork in the Road

Thu Sep 02, 2021 8:36 pm

WesternDC6B wrote:
If present engines are carried over,...?


No. The engines are where virtually all gains will be made. If it were possible to improve the 737's airframe to the point where it was truly competitive to the 32X/22X, they would have already done so.

Not much point to a new AC or even a further iteration without significant powerplant upgrade.

FlyingElvii wrote:
“If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it” has been a corporate philosophy for a long time. Until something comes along the breaks the mold and makes economic sense to absorb the costs of switching, your grandchildren’s children will still be flying on 737’s.


It's broke. Fix it.

If not for commonality with preexisting fleets, delivery slots and most of all, heavy discounting, the sales gap between this and the 32X would be even more profound.

BCA need to see how much further they can ride that out and still keep the lights on. But there will come a point this decade where even these factors will no longer be viable. So unless you are old enough that your grandchildren's children are already born, your prognostication will not be realized.


jetmatt777 wrote:
I predict Southwest will be brought kicking and screaming into a new aircraft type; and once they have it they will launch their advertising blasting other airlines that still happen to operate the 737 for flying antiquated equipment.


Yep. And doubly so for FR.
 
BoeingGuy
Posts: 6679
Joined: Fri Dec 10, 2010 6:01 pm

Re: Boeing approaching decision on narrowbody design.

Fri Sep 03, 2021 12:31 am

This title is incredibly misleading and should be corrected or deleted. It indicates that Boeing is about to make a decision on a narrow body design. That is not correct. There is some PD activity going on, but unless there is something going on that I’m not privy to, they are nowhere near a final design or launch.

I’ll dispense with my frustrations over 25 years of self-serving bad Boeing leadership, as I’ve expressed it before. Boeing long ago had the chance to launch an A321 killer, but instead mismanaged the 787, 747-8, KC-46, 777X and 737 Max programs so incompetently that there still are not sufficient resources available to develop a new airplane. Everything now is being focused on the 777-9 and 737-10 programs.
 
jetmatt777
Posts: 4812
Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2005 2:16 am

Re: Boeing approaching decision on narrowbody design.

Fri Sep 03, 2021 12:35 am

BoeingGuy wrote:
This title is incredibly misleading and should be corrected or deleted. It indicates that Boeing is about to make a decision on a narrow body design. That is not correct. There is some PD activity going on, but unless there is something going on that I’m not privy to, they are nowhere near a final design or launch.

I’ll dispense with my frustrations over 25 years of self-serving bad Boeing leadership, as I’ve expressed it before. Boeing long ago had the chance to launch an A321 killer, but instead mismanaged the 787, 747-8, KC-46, 777X and 737 Max programs so incompetently that there still are not sufficient resources available to develop a new airplane. Everything now is being focused on the 777-9 and 737-10 programs.


I don’t know who changed the title but the original was more appropriate “Approaching Fork in the road”.
 
silentbob
Posts: 1647
Joined: Tue Aug 15, 2006 1:26 pm

Re: Boeing approaching decision on narrowbody design.

Fri Sep 03, 2021 12:46 am

jetmatt777 wrote:
BoeingGuy wrote:
This title is incredibly misleading and should be corrected or deleted. It indicates that Boeing is about to make a decision on a narrow body design. That is not correct. There is some PD activity going on, but unless there is something going on that I’m not privy to, they are nowhere near a final design or launch.

I’ll dispense with my frustrations over 25 years of self-serving bad Boeing leadership, as I’ve expressed it before. Boeing long ago had the chance to launch an A321 killer, but instead mismanaged the 787, 747-8, KC-46, 777X and 737 Max programs so incompetently that there still are not sufficient resources available to develop a new airplane. Everything now is being focused on the 777-9 and 737-10 programs.


I don’t know who changed the title but the original was more appropriate “Approaching Fork in the road”.

...again
 
BoeingGuy
Posts: 6679
Joined: Fri Dec 10, 2010 6:01 pm

Re: Boeing approaching decision on narrowbody design.

Fri Sep 03, 2021 12:53 am

silentbob wrote:
jetmatt777 wrote:
BoeingGuy wrote:
This title is incredibly misleading and should be corrected or deleted. It indicates that Boeing is about to make a decision on a narrow body design. That is not correct. There is some PD activity going on, but unless there is something going on that I’m not privy to, they are nowhere near a final design or launch.

I’ll dispense with my frustrations over 25 years of self-serving bad Boeing leadership, as I’ve expressed it before. Boeing long ago had the chance to launch an A321 killer, but instead mismanaged the 787, 747-8, KC-46, 777X and 737 Max programs so incompetently that there still are not sufficient resources available to develop a new airplane. Everything now is being focused on the 777-9 and 737-10 programs.


I don’t know who changed the title but the original was more appropriate “Approaching Fork in the road”.

...again


The NMA was a serious program with a large team and engineering building dedicated to it. I was assigned to it part time at one point. Projected EIS of 2025 or 2026. I won’t divulge proprietary information, but suffice it to say it had some advanced features. Would have leap frogged the A321.

Then of course Dave killed the program while bringing in his GE cronies. Most of the engineering resources got pulled to 737 Max return to service or getting the 777-9 certified.
 
User avatar
CarlosSi
Posts: 849
Joined: Sat Jul 08, 2017 8:29 pm

Re: Boeing approaching decision on narrowbody design.

Fri Sep 03, 2021 3:04 am

They're in the whirlpool of troubles.

777x delayed, 737 max had issues for so long. Optimistically we would just be 4 years from EIS for the NMA. 2030 doesn't sound crazy at all. Boeing lost this generation of narrowbodies to Airbus. They can recover later when airlines are wantingo to go through a next round of replacements. JUst not now.
 
moa999
Posts: 1103
Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2018 6:37 am

Re: Boeing approaching decision on narrowbody design.

Fri Sep 03, 2021 3:21 am

Haven't we seen this headline every year for about the last eight years.
And each time Boeing gets nowhere closer.
 
Opus99
Posts: 2712
Joined: Thu May 30, 2019 10:51 pm

Re: Boeing approaching decision on narrowbody design.

Fri Sep 03, 2021 3:23 am

BoeingGuy wrote:
silentbob wrote:
jetmatt777 wrote:

I don’t know who changed the title but the original was more appropriate “Approaching Fork in the road”.

...again


The NMA was a serious program with a large team and engineering building dedicated to it. I was assigned to it part time at one point. Projected EIS of 2025 or 2026. I won’t divulge proprietary information, but suffice it to say it had some advanced features. Would have leap frogged the A321.

Then of course Dave killed the program while bringing in his GE cronies. Most of the engineering resources got pulled to 737 Max return to service or getting the 777-9 certified.

But isn’t it the best thing to get those programs back on track first because they were/are extremely off track
 
Opus99
Posts: 2712
Joined: Thu May 30, 2019 10:51 pm

Re: Boeing approaching decision on narrowbody design.

Fri Sep 03, 2021 3:24 am

moa999 wrote:
Haven't we seen this headline every year for about the last eight years.
And each time Boeing gets nowhere closer.

Read the original post
 
Spetsnaz55
Posts: 310
Joined: Wed Feb 20, 2019 2:38 am

Re: Boeing approaching decision on narrowbody design.

Fri Sep 03, 2021 4:28 am

BoeingGuy wrote:
silentbob wrote:
jetmatt777 wrote:

I don’t know who changed the title but the original was more appropriate “Approaching Fork in the road”.

...again


The NMA was a serious program with a large team and engineering building dedicated to it. I was assigned to it part time at one point. Projected EIS of 2025 or 2026. I won’t divulge proprietary information, but suffice it to say it had some advanced features. Would have leap frogged the A321.

Then of course Dave killed the program while bringing in his GE cronies. Most of the engineering resources got pulled to 737 Max return to service or getting the 777-9 certified.



Yep I talked with some NMA engineers a while back to. Entire wing practice boxes were built for automated testing and then ended up scrapped. Such a shame
 
User avatar
LAX772LR
Posts: 14341
Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2014 11:06 pm

Re: The Approaching Fork in the Road

Fri Sep 03, 2021 5:04 am

FlyingElvii wrote:
“If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it” has been a corporate philosophy for a long time. Until something comes along the breaks the mold and makes economic sense to absorb the costs of switching, your grandchildren’s children will still be flying on 737’s.

One could easily argue that it was broke(n) in 2011, and they didn't fix it.... in fact, their ineptitude left two smoking holes in the ground/water, that never should've happened.
 
User avatar
aemoreira1981
Posts: 3963
Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2017 12:17 am

Re: The Approaching Fork in the Road

Fri Sep 03, 2021 5:34 am

FlyingElvii wrote:
“If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it” has been a corporate philosophy for a long time. Until something comes along the breaks the mold and makes economic sense to absorb the costs of switching, your grandchildren’s children will still be flying on 737’s.


The problem is that the 737's limit has been reached with how close it is to the ground. Additionally, the 737 cannot accept containerized cargo, which is why it has lost nearly every legacy airline in Europe to Airbus (the A320 and A321 can accept the LD3-45). Some other requirements in a new replacement will be STOL performance and range to 4,000 nmi at least, maybe even 4,500 nmi.
 
Noshow
Posts: 2851
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 3:20 pm

Re: Boeing approaching decision on narrowbody design.

Fri Sep 03, 2021 6:18 am

Neither the MAX nor the neo are close to end of production. Still both manufacturers will need to have new families ready one day.
At least nobody claimed Boeing had "launched" a new narrowbody in the headline.

I hope Boeing goes for that strut braced high wing.
 
Daysleeper
Posts: 743
Joined: Sun Dec 20, 2009 3:33 pm

Re: Boeing approaching decision on narrowbody design.

Fri Sep 03, 2021 8:03 am

Inaccurate thread title or not I find it an interesting topic. We have seen some “pie in the sky” proposals from Airbus with blended wings, hydrogen etc. Has there been anything similar from Boeing that I may have missed?

The reason I ask is I’m not entirely convinced that there is going to be any real benefit over existing designs for another “tube with wings” replacement – For Airbus at least. The A32X series has had incremental updates throughout its life and a major one with the Neo. We also know they are researching a new composite wing manufacturing process that could plausibly be applied to a future A32X variant, again extending its useful life – So what would they have to gain with a clean sheet narrow body? Composite fuselage? Perhaps, but I don’t think that is really going to be a game changer for a narrow body, especially when you factor in the high cycle count.

Boeing however are going to have to do something. The 737 is EOL, its internal systems only just scraped though EASA certification largely thanks to grand fathering, and it simply has no more room to grow. So, at some point they are going to have to bite the bullet and develop what would have been the NMA to take them into the 2030’s.

The problem might be by the time they have done that and developed a true A32X competitor, Airbus’s “pie in the sky” dreams may well be becoming a reality, thus allowing them to again leap frog Boeing in the narrow body market.

All very interesting stuff, but sadly from an enthusiast standpoint I doubt we are going to see anything other than new variants this decade :(
 
RJMAZ
Posts: 2508
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2016 2:54 am

Re: Boeing approaching decision on narrowbody design.

Fri Sep 03, 2021 8:34 am

Boeing is definitely the best when it comes to picking which way the market is going. The 787 Vs A380 is the perfect example of this.

I expect that Boeing knows that low and even zero emission designs will become critical. They will also know that market fragmentation will continue. I can't see how a zero emission design share many parts with an aircraft capable of flying 4,000nm.

They might launch the longer range 200-250 seater first and the short range comes later. The NMA was meant to be the longer range small aircraft.

Boeing can not launch a short range low/zero emission aircraft and the next size up is the 787. They will need something between the two.
 
Flying-Tiger
Posts: 4152
Joined: Mon Aug 23, 1999 5:35 am

Re: Boeing approaching decision on narrowbody design.

Fri Sep 03, 2021 8:45 am

Noshow wrote:
Neither the MAX nor the neo are close to end of production. Still both manufacturers will need to have new families ready one day.
At least nobody claimed Boeing had "launched" a new narrowbody in the headline.

I hope Boeing goes for that strut braced high wing.


The key words are "ready one day". With electric aviation coming up big time and at least a prospect of hydrogen employed, too, a lot of additional risk has been put into the evaluation matrix. As much as I hate to say as an aviation enthusiast: a wait-and-see approach with only derivate development may commercially be the more opportune move for both A & B in the next few years. The risk of investing 10+ bn USD / EUR into a fairly short-lived project due to market disruption on the engine side and - likely - lower capacity end is fairly high.
 
Noshow
Posts: 2851
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 3:20 pm

Re: Boeing approaching decision on narrowbody design.

Fri Sep 03, 2021 9:10 am

This is why I expect the next families to be conventional jet engine powered. There is still a lot of innovation going on aside from power sources: New materials, robot manufacturing, optimized aerodynamic shapes, future cockpits, networking, integrated logistics. Batteries are no option for bigger airliners. Maybe, only maybe, "green" hydrogen will be coming on the long run if it can be made cheap enough.
It looks like the more conventional SAF will be the coming power source instead.

If A and B wait too long they might face some "Tesla"-style startup competing or capable players out of commercial sight like Lockheed or Sierra Nevada, General Atomics or even the Chinese?
 
BrianDromey
Posts: 3167
Joined: Sun Dec 10, 2006 2:23 am

Re: Boeing approaching decision on narrowbody design.

Fri Sep 03, 2021 10:00 am

Why does Boeing 'need' to develop a successor to the MAX right now? They have good visibility of production timelines and a competitive product offering in the narrow body market. While the -10 can't go as far as the XLR and the runway performance is not as good, how much of this is really required? I don't think there is a business case for another all-new single-aisle aircraft with currently available engine technology.

It would appear that Boeing can capture around 40-45% of the market with the MAX. Over the next 20 years Airbus predicts a market for approximately 30,000 single aisle aircraft, so Boeing should capture around 12-14,000 orders. An all new-aircraft will cost somewhere north of $6 Billion (the cost of A220 to Bombardier).

Lets assume NSA could capture 60-65% of the market, thats 18,000-20,000 aircraft. To capture those 6,000 additional orders over 20 years Boeing needs to spend $6 Billion today and take risks beyond those of the 787 and 777X programme, because NSA will kill the 737. Lets assume the best case scenario that Boeing can develop it for 6 Billion, deliver on-time and that Airbus can't make an NEO+ competitive with the all-new NSA. The development costs add about $1 million to the price of the additional aircraft Boeing might hope to sell. Which is not too bad, in isolation.
There is another risk and its huge. By killing the 737 major customers like Southwest, flyDubai and Ryanair are forced to choose a new aircraft family. Without huge launch orders from these airlines, none of whom seem keen on moving away from the 737, the risk is unpalatable.
 
JonesNL
Posts: 483
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2019 2:40 pm

Re: Boeing approaching decision on narrowbody design.

Fri Sep 03, 2021 11:01 am

BrianDromey wrote:
Why does Boeing 'need' to develop a successor to the MAX right now? They have good visibility of production timelines and a competitive product offering in the narrow body market. While the -10 can't go as far as the XLR and the runway performance is not as good, how much of this is really required? I don't think there is a business case for another all-new single-aisle aircraft with currently available engine technology.

It would appear that Boeing can capture around 40-45% of the market with the MAX. Over the next 20 years Airbus predicts a market for approximately 30,000 single aisle aircraft, so Boeing should capture around 12-14,000 orders. An all new-aircraft will cost somewhere north of $6 Billion (the cost of A220 to Bombardier).

Lets assume NSA could capture 60-65% of the market, thats 18,000-20,000 aircraft. To capture those 6,000 additional orders over 20 years Boeing needs to spend $6 Billion today and take risks beyond those of the 787 and 777X programme, because NSA will kill the 737. Lets assume the best case scenario that Boeing can develop it for 6 Billion, deliver on-time and that Airbus can't make an NEO+ competitive with the all-new NSA. The development costs add about $1 million to the price of the additional aircraft Boeing might hope to sell. Which is not too bad, in isolation.
There is another risk and its huge. By killing the 737 major customers like Southwest, flyDubai and Ryanair are forced to choose a new aircraft family. Without huge launch orders from these airlines, none of whom seem keen on moving away from the 737, the risk is unpalatable.


I think your numbers are skewed and not in proportion. 737 replacement would cost probably at least double. And the market share can drop even further to 25-35% if an potential A225 can gain traction and Airbus can have the required output. The current outlook is 75 x A32x and 14 x A22x. So, around 90, while Boeing is looking to reach 50. And keep in mind the biggest orders for the 737 are already out the door. There is no customer anymore that can/will place big orders like Southwest or Ryanairs.

In my view Boeing has a lot to lose, but a do nothing scenario is the most viable one from available tech and financial perspective.
 
Opus99
Posts: 2712
Joined: Thu May 30, 2019 10:51 pm

Re: Boeing approaching decision on narrowbody design.

Fri Sep 03, 2021 11:11 am

JonesNL wrote:
BrianDromey wrote:
Why does Boeing 'need' to develop a successor to the MAX right now? They have good visibility of production timelines and a competitive product offering in the narrow body market. While the -10 can't go as far as the XLR and the runway performance is not as good, how much of this is really required? I don't think there is a business case for another all-new single-aisle aircraft with currently available engine technology.

It would appear that Boeing can capture around 40-45% of the market with the MAX. Over the next 20 years Airbus predicts a market for approximately 30,000 single aisle aircraft, so Boeing should capture around 12-14,000 orders. An all new-aircraft will cost somewhere north of $6 Billion (the cost of A220 to Bombardier).

Lets assume NSA could capture 60-65% of the market, thats 18,000-20,000 aircraft. To capture those 6,000 additional orders over 20 years Boeing needs to spend $6 Billion today and take risks beyond those of the 787 and 777X programme, because NSA will kill the 737. Lets assume the best case scenario that Boeing can develop it for 6 Billion, deliver on-time and that Airbus can't make an NEO+ competitive with the all-new NSA. The development costs add about $1 million to the price of the additional aircraft Boeing might hope to sell. Which is not too bad, in isolation.
There is another risk and its huge. By killing the 737 major customers like Southwest, flyDubai and Ryanair are forced to choose a new aircraft family. Without huge launch orders from these airlines, none of whom seem keen on moving away from the 737, the risk is unpalatable.


I think your numbers are skewed and not in proportion. 737 replacement would cost probably at least double. And the market share can drop even further to 25-35% if an potential A225 can gain traction and Airbus can have the required output. The current outlook is 75 x A32x and 14 x A22x. So, around 90, while Boeing is looking to reach 50. And keep in mind the biggest orders for the 737 are already out the door. There is no customer anymore that can/will place big orders like Southwest or Ryanairs.

In my view Boeing has a lot to lose, but a do nothing scenario is the most viable one from available tech and financial perspective.


There’s Air France-KLM looking into the KLM-Transavia fleet. There’s AA which has about 200 737s to replace and of course the big one. China. Now I don’t when these will happen but they still have that and then top ups etc. The max will be fine. Boeing will be fine. Leaders? No but competitions? Yes and after their recent plight that should be good enough for them
 
JonesNL
Posts: 483
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2019 2:40 pm

Re: Boeing approaching decision on narrowbody design.

Fri Sep 03, 2021 11:27 am

Opus99 wrote:
JonesNL wrote:
BrianDromey wrote:
Why does Boeing 'need' to develop a successor to the MAX right now? They have good visibility of production timelines and a competitive product offering in the narrow body market. While the -10 can't go as far as the XLR and the runway performance is not as good, how much of this is really required? I don't think there is a business case for another all-new single-aisle aircraft with currently available engine technology.

It would appear that Boeing can capture around 40-45% of the market with the MAX. Over the next 20 years Airbus predicts a market for approximately 30,000 single aisle aircraft, so Boeing should capture around 12-14,000 orders. An all new-aircraft will cost somewhere north of $6 Billion (the cost of A220 to Bombardier).

Lets assume NSA could capture 60-65% of the market, thats 18,000-20,000 aircraft. To capture those 6,000 additional orders over 20 years Boeing needs to spend $6 Billion today and take risks beyond those of the 787 and 777X programme, because NSA will kill the 737. Lets assume the best case scenario that Boeing can develop it for 6 Billion, deliver on-time and that Airbus can't make an NEO+ competitive with the all-new NSA. The development costs add about $1 million to the price of the additional aircraft Boeing might hope to sell. Which is not too bad, in isolation.
There is another risk and its huge. By killing the 737 major customers like Southwest, flyDubai and Ryanair are forced to choose a new aircraft family. Without huge launch orders from these airlines, none of whom seem keen on moving away from the 737, the risk is unpalatable.


I think your numbers are skewed and not in proportion. 737 replacement would cost probably at least double. And the market share can drop even further to 25-35% if an potential A225 can gain traction and Airbus can have the required output. The current outlook is 75 x A32x and 14 x A22x. So, around 90, while Boeing is looking to reach 50. And keep in mind the biggest orders for the 737 are already out the door. There is no customer anymore that can/will place big orders like Southwest or Ryanairs.

In my view Boeing has a lot to lose, but a do nothing scenario is the most viable one from available tech and financial perspective.


There’s Air France-KLM looking into the KLM-Transavia fleet. There’s AA which has about 200 737s to replace and of course the big one. China. Now I don’t when these will happen but they still have that and then top ups etc. The max will be fine. Boeing will be fine. Leaders? No but competitions? Yes and after their recent plight that should be good enough for them


I don’t think AA will order 200+ at one go but will split it in multiple tranches. Which is by all means quite big. Same for Klm. China is different, I don’t expect big orders until trade disputes are settled, which seems unlikely with Bidens current stance.

While the Max will probably be the most successful 737, the bigger picture is less optimal. A competitor that produces/twice as much will make 737 less and less attractive as time goes by. Spares will be a bit more expensive, servicecontracts will be a bit more expensive, production will be a bit more expensive and lastly; your competitor will be much better funded to counter attack.

Still, the only option for Boeing is stick to the Max and somehow prevent the gap becoming to big.
 
jfk777
Posts: 7509
Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2006 7:23 am

Re: Boeing approaching decision on narrowbody design.

Fri Sep 03, 2021 11:44 am

AA does have many 737-800 to replace eventually, but many are new. They placed a huge order before 9/11 and had about 75 delivered in the years after 9/11 then had a long pause until more arrived. About 2007/2008 they started deliveries again. Recently AA decided to retire the early 75 738 so their 737-800 fleet will made of the later bunch with deliveries going for many until the 737 max started to be delivered. AA has a huge 737-800 fleet spanning over 200.
 
BrianDromey
Posts: 3167
Joined: Sun Dec 10, 2006 2:23 am

Re: Boeing approaching decision on narrowbody design.

Fri Sep 03, 2021 12:20 pm

JonesNL wrote:
I think your numbers are skewed and not in proportion. 737 replacement would cost probably at least double. And the market share can drop even further to 25-35% if an potential A225 can gain traction and Airbus can have the required output. The current outlook is 75 x A32x and 14 x A22x. So, around 90, while Boeing is looking to reach 50. And keep in mind the biggest orders for the 737 are already out the door. There is no customer anymore that can/will place big orders like Southwest or Ryanairs.

In my view Boeing has a lot to lose, but a do nothing scenario is the most viable one from available tech and financial perspective.


I was aiming for a best case scenario for Boeing in terms of the cost of the program but I agree that the "dong nothing" until there is a generational change in engine technology makes sense. Let's say $12 Billion spend to capture 60% of the market compared to 35%, or around 9000 extra aircraft for Boeing. Airbus will at least have the option to "MAX" the A320 and/or investigate variations like the A320.5 and the A322, likely with a new wing, inbox and even landing gear. It might not be feasible, or a stretch too far, but if they can remain competitive with NSA for $2-3 Billion they will have a fair advantage and Boeing wont be able to 'flip' huge A320 customers like easyJet, jetBlue, Delta, AA, UA, China Eastern or China Southern.

Airbus have a real strategic advantage with their current fuselage offerings, assuming that a new engine technology can be applied to both platforms. The A220 can be optimised around the 150-180 seat size and the A320 around the 180-250 seat markets. Can one fuselage diameter really cover such a range efficiently at the extremes? Is Boeing in a situation where it needs to develop two aircraft as one family? A sort of 757/767 parallel 50 years later?
 
Opus99
Posts: 2712
Joined: Thu May 30, 2019 10:51 pm

Re: Boeing approaching decision on narrowbody design.

Fri Sep 03, 2021 12:45 pm

JonesNL wrote:
Opus99 wrote:
JonesNL wrote:

I think your numbers are skewed and not in proportion. 737 replacement would cost probably at least double. And the market share can drop even further to 25-35% if an potential A225 can gain traction and Airbus can have the required output. The current outlook is 75 x A32x and 14 x A22x. So, around 90, while Boeing is looking to reach 50. And keep in mind the biggest orders for the 737 are already out the door. There is no customer anymore that can/will place big orders like Southwest or Ryanairs.

In my view Boeing has a lot to lose, but a do nothing scenario is the most viable one from available tech and financial perspective.


There’s Air France-KLM looking into the KLM-Transavia fleet. There’s AA which has about 200 737s to replace and of course the big one. China. Now I don’t when these will happen but they still have that and then top ups etc. The max will be fine. Boeing will be fine. Leaders? No but competitions? Yes and after their recent plight that should be good enough for them


I don’t think AA will order 200+ at one go but will split it in multiple tranches. Which is by all means quite big. Same for Klm. China is different, I don’t expect big orders until trade disputes are settled, which seems unlikely with Bidens current stance.

While the Max will probably be the most successful 737, the bigger picture is less optimal. A competitor that produces/twice as much will make 737 less and less attractive as time goes by. Spares will be a bit more expensive, servicecontracts will be a bit more expensive, production will be a bit more expensive and lastly; your competitor will be much better funded to counter attack.

Still, the only option for Boeing is stick to the Max and somehow prevent the gap becoming to big.

There’s nothing wrong with second place or last place depending on how you look at it. Boeing should just focus on building good planes with good quality at this point. Which is why sorting out ALL the issues on the 777X and 87 is very important. If Airbus is going to innovate and move forward then sorry, that’s the price you have to pay. Just focus on actually delivering what your customers contracted for first. If Boeing can do just that, they’ve done something..the bare minimum but for them it’s something
 
JonesNL
Posts: 483
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2019 2:40 pm

Re: Boeing approaching decision on narrowbody design.

Fri Sep 03, 2021 2:02 pm

Opus99 wrote:
JonesNL wrote:
Opus99 wrote:

There’s Air France-KLM looking into the KLM-Transavia fleet. There’s AA which has about 200 737s to replace and of course the big one. China. Now I don’t when these will happen but they still have that and then top ups etc. The max will be fine. Boeing will be fine. Leaders? No but competitions? Yes and after their recent plight that should be good enough for them


I don’t think AA will order 200+ at one go but will split it in multiple tranches. Which is by all means quite big. Same for Klm. China is different, I don’t expect big orders until trade disputes are settled, which seems unlikely with Bidens current stance.

While the Max will probably be the most successful 737, the bigger picture is less optimal. A competitor that produces/twice as much will make 737 less and less attractive as time goes by. Spares will be a bit more expensive, servicecontracts will be a bit more expensive, production will be a bit more expensive and lastly; your competitor will be much better funded to counter attack.

Still, the only option for Boeing is stick to the Max and somehow prevent the gap becoming to big.

There’s nothing wrong with second place or last place depending on how you look at it. Boeing should just focus on building good planes with good quality at this point. Which is why sorting out ALL the issues on the 777X and 87 is very important. If Airbus is going to innovate and move forward then sorry, that’s the price you have to pay. Just focus on actually delivering what your customers contracted for first. If Boeing can do just that, they’ve done something..the bare minimum but for them it’s something


While I agree there is nothing wrong with second and its the best that Boeing can get at the moment. They will have to turn the trend with the NSA. Otherwise they will be marginalized in the market as Lockheed, Mcd, etc…
 
Opus99
Posts: 2712
Joined: Thu May 30, 2019 10:51 pm

Re: Boeing approaching decision on narrowbody design.

Fri Sep 03, 2021 2:42 pm

JonesNL wrote:
Opus99 wrote:
JonesNL wrote:

I don’t think AA will order 200+ at one go but will split it in multiple tranches. Which is by all means quite big. Same for Klm. China is different, I don’t expect big orders until trade disputes are settled, which seems unlikely with Bidens current stance.

While the Max will probably be the most successful 737, the bigger picture is less optimal. A competitor that produces/twice as much will make 737 less and less attractive as time goes by. Spares will be a bit more expensive, servicecontracts will be a bit more expensive, production will be a bit more expensive and lastly; your competitor will be much better funded to counter attack.

Still, the only option for Boeing is stick to the Max and somehow prevent the gap becoming to big.

There’s nothing wrong with second place or last place depending on how you look at it. Boeing should just focus on building good planes with good quality at this point. Which is why sorting out ALL the issues on the 777X and 87 is very important. If Airbus is going to innovate and move forward then sorry, that’s the price you have to pay. Just focus on actually delivering what your customers contracted for first. If Boeing can do just that, they’ve done something..the bare minimum but for them it’s something


While I agree there is nothing wrong with second and its the best that Boeing can get at the moment. They will have to turn the trend with the NSA. Otherwise they will be marginalized in the market as Lockheed, Mcd, etc…

I’ve thought about that and I’ve said the difference with that era is there were actually other viable options. Boeing biggest benefit is the clout they already have the 737 and if you’re not buying Airbus then you’re buying Boeing.
 
User avatar
WesternDC6B
Topic Author
Posts: 848
Joined: Thu Mar 14, 2013 3:05 pm

Re: Boeing approaching decision on narrowbody design.

Fri Sep 03, 2021 5:31 pm

BoeingGuy wrote:
This title is incredibly misleading and should be corrected or deleted. It indicates that Boeing is about to make a decision on a narrow body design. That is not correct. There is some PD activity going on, but unless there is something going on that I’m not privy to, they are nowhere near a final design or launch.

I’ll dispense with my frustrations over 25 years of self-serving bad Boeing leadership, as I’ve expressed it before. Boeing long ago had the chance to launch an A321 killer, but instead mismanaged the 787, 747-8, KC-46, 777X and 737 Max programs so incompetently that there still are not sufficient resources available to develop a new airplane. Everything now is being focused on the 777-9 and 737-10 programs.


I'm implying no such thing.
 
User avatar
WesternDC6B
Topic Author
Posts: 848
Joined: Thu Mar 14, 2013 3:05 pm

Re: What will airlines do when Boeing replaces the 737?

Fri Sep 03, 2021 5:38 pm

Moderators: you folks are the boss, but, I believe my original subject title was more appropriate. Just saying...
 
User avatar
DarkSnowyNight
Posts: 2970
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2012 7:59 pm

Re: Boeing approaching decision on narrowbody design.

Sat Sep 04, 2021 12:15 am

Opus99 wrote:
There’s nothing wrong with second place or last place depending on how you look at it.


Lockheed, Convair, Ilyushin, Dassault, Bombardier, etc, will tell you otherwise. Commercial Aviation has no room for bit players. It is not a marketplace that will reward or even support runners-up. The size simply is not big enough relative to the development and manufacturing costs required to bring a new product to market.

You do not see this in most other industries, so it may not be readily apparent. But for virtually all capacity increments there are almost never more than two players.


Opus99 wrote:
Boeing should just focus on building good planes with good quality at this point. Which is why sorting out ALL the issues on the 777X and 87 is very important. If Airbus is going to innovate and move forward then sorry, that’s the price you have to pay. Just focus on actually delivering what your customers contracted for first. If Boeing can do just that, they’ve done something..the bare minimum but for them it’s something


BCA must focus on quality, yes. It is their single weakest point, and that is a very unforgiving one to have in this business. They will have to develop something new in the NSA market. But they must fix quality first.







BrianDromey wrote:
Airbus have a real strategic advantage with their current fuselage offerings, assuming that a new engine technology can be applied to both platforms. The A220 can be optimised around the 150-180 seat size and the A320 around the 180-250 seat markets. Can one fuselage diameter really cover such a range efficiently at the extremes? Is Boeing in a situation where it needs to develop two aircraft as one family? A sort of 757/767 parallel 50 years later?


That is almost certainly the best possible route for them. By staying above a certain capacity benchmark, they will have a product that is more resistant to disruptors like electric, hyd, etc.

What is becoming more and more clear, however, is that BCA simply do not have anything like the resources to develop something new. Made worse by the cleanup WRT the MAX and clearing out the 787 issues while also developing the 777X.
 
Opus99
Posts: 2712
Joined: Thu May 30, 2019 10:51 pm

Re: Boeing approaching decision on narrowbody design.

Sat Sep 04, 2021 7:00 am

DarkSnowyNight wrote:
Opus99 wrote:
There’s nothing wrong with second place or last place depending on how you look at it.


Lockheed, Convair, Ilyushin, Dassault, Bombardier, etc, will tell you otherwise. Commercial Aviation has no room for bit players. It is not a marketplace that will reward or even support runners-up. The size simply is not big enough relative to the development and manufacturing costs required to bring a new product to market.

You do not see this in most other industries, so it may not be readily apparent. But for virtually all capacity increments there are almost never more than two players.


Opus99 wrote:
Boeing should just focus on building good planes with good quality at this point. Which is why sorting out ALL the issues on the 777X and 87 is very important. If Airbus is going to innovate and move forward then sorry, that’s the price you have to pay. Just focus on actually delivering what your customers contracted for first. If Boeing can do just that, they’ve done something..the bare minimum but for them it’s something


BCA must focus on quality, yes. It is their single weakest point, and that is a very unforgiving one to have in this business. They will have to develop something new in the NSA market. But they must fix quality first.







BrianDromey wrote:
Airbus have a real strategic advantage with their current fuselage offerings, assuming that a new engine technology can be applied to both platforms. The A220 can be optimised around the 150-180 seat size and the A320 around the 180-250 seat markets. Can one fuselage diameter really cover such a range efficiently at the extremes? Is Boeing in a situation where it needs to develop two aircraft as one family? A sort of 757/767 parallel 50 years later?


That is almost certainly the best possible route for them. By staying above a certain capacity benchmark, they will have a product that is more resistant to disruptors like electric, hyd, etc.

What is becoming more and more clear, however, is that BCA simply do not have anything like the resources to develop something new. Made worse by the cleanup WRT the MAX and clearing out the 787 issues while also developing the 777X.

But that’s the point. There’s too much demand for one and enough demand for only two. That is Boeing blessing at the moment. Boeing is obviously more than a bit player. None of those OEMs can talk about a backlog of 4000-5000 aircraft. I don’t even know if any of them have produced such number at any given time. I might be wrong. But the fact that airlines are not spoilt for choice is a blessing for Boeing and one they already capitalise on
 
F27500
Posts: 1057
Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 12:52 am

Re: What will airlines do when Boeing replaces the 737?

Sun Sep 05, 2021 3:40 am

They're never gonna replace it. They'll just keep on stretching and pulling it instead of coming up with a new concept. I can see it now .. the 737-5000NEOMAX
 
Speedy752
Posts: 123
Joined: Fri Dec 11, 2020 4:13 am

Re: Boeing approaching decision on narrowbody design.

Sun Sep 05, 2021 7:38 pm

RJMAZ wrote:
Boeing is definitely the best when it comes to picking which way the market is going. The 787 Vs A380 is the perfect example of this.

I expect that Boeing knows that low and even zero emission designs will become critical. They will also know that market fragmentation will continue. I can't see how a zero emission design share many parts with an aircraft capable of flying 4,000nm.

They might launch the longer range 200-250 seater first and the short range comes later. The NMA was meant to be the longer range small aircraft.

Boeing can not launch a short range low/zero emission aircraft and the next size up is the 787. They will need something between the two.


I’ve wondered the same thing and am in disbelief that NMA hasn’t been launched for this reason. Common cockpit with 787, designed for high utilization missions. It’s clear the sizing of aircraft is getting bigger and will continue, it’s also becoming clear that like most new tech, zero emissions aircraft will start small, so you may be looking at no conventionally powered ac under 150 seats or so, but a NMA wouldn’t likely have such a zero emissions competitor for a few generations. With the restrictions on older aircraft ending 767F production at the end of the decade, pax+cargo on such a design would seem like a winner. Not to mention BCA needs a winner to show the market it can still build a safe, reliable, problem free aircraft the first time around. Plus they have that expensive carbon wing factory for 777x that we know won’t have the volume of 77W production…
 
Speedy752
Posts: 123
Joined: Fri Dec 11, 2020 4:13 am

Re: Boeing approaching decision on narrowbody design.

Sun Sep 05, 2021 7:48 pm

BrianDromey wrote:
JonesNL wrote:
I think your numbers are skewed and not in proportion. 737 replacement would cost probably at least double. And the market share can drop even further to 25-35% if an potential A225 can gain traction and Airbus can have the required output. The current outlook is 75 x A32x and 14 x A22x. So, around 90, while Boeing is looking to reach 50. And keep in mind the biggest orders for the 737 are already out the door. There is no customer anymore that can/will place big orders like Southwest or Ryanairs.

In my view Boeing has a lot to lose, but a do nothing scenario is the most viable one from available tech and financial perspective.


I was aiming for a best case scenario for Boeing in terms of the cost of the program but I agree that the "dong nothing" until there is a generational change in engine technology makes sense. Let's say $12 Billion spend to capture 60% of the market compared to 35%, or around 9000 extra aircraft for Boeing. Airbus will at least have the option to "MAX" the A320 and/or investigate variations like the A320.5 and the A322, likely with a new wing, inbox and even landing gear. It might not be feasible, or a stretch too far, but if they can remain competitive with NSA for $2-3 Billion they will have a fair advantage and Boeing wont be able to 'flip' huge A320 customers like easyJet, jetBlue, Delta, AA, UA, China Eastern or China Southern.

Airbus have a real strategic advantage with their current fuselage offerings, assuming that a new engine technology can be applied to both platforms. The A220 can be optimised around the 150-180 seat size and the A320 around the 180-250 seat markets. Can one fuselage diameter really cover such a range efficiently at the extremes? Is Boeing in a situation where it needs to develop two aircraft as one family? A sort of 757/767 parallel 50 years later?


I think per the original discussion, there’s about a 0% chance either A or B change current offerings of MAX or NEO without a new engine technology. Once that comes, new airframes will be needed, Boeing will have to and Airbus will either follow or look like the “stuck in the past” manufacturer. At that point there may be different technologies but I’d assume relationships rather than commonality will win the order contests, and single type operators will simply need to adapt. While the Southwest, Ryanair, easyjet, air Asia, indigos of the world are large, most airlines have diverse fleets already which makes this more a minor annoyance than a major disruptor.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: res77W and 11 guests

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos